Centre for Spine Studies and Surgery, Queens Medical Centre, West Block, D Floor, Derby Road, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK.
Eur Spine J. 2012 Feb;21(2):214-9. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-2008-y. Epub 2011 Sep 4.
Transforaminal epidural injection of steroids is used to treat lumbar radicular pain. However, there are only a few well-designed randomized, controlled studies on the effectiveness of steroid injection.
Hence, this study aims to assess the effectiveness of steroid injection to treat lumbar radicular pain using a meta-analysis of transforaminal epidural injection therapy for low back and lumbar radicular pain. The comparison was based on the mean difference in the Visual Analogue Score (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) from baseline to the specified followed up.
The available literature of lumbar transforaminal epidural injections in managing low back and radicular pain was reviewed. Data sources included relevant literature of the English language identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to 2009, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Finally, the search included the Current Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials.
The initial search identified 126 papers. After screening, five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were studied for analysis and only three of these had followed-up patients systematically with pain and disability outcome scores to 3 months and of these, only one had follow up to 12 months. A total of 187 patients ('treatment group' receiving local anaesthetic/steroid injection) were compared with 181 patients ('control' group, receiving local anaesthetic only or saline injection). Improvement in pain (standardised mean difference in VAS 0.2 in favour of 'treatment'; 95%CI: -0.41 to 0.00, p = 0.05, I squared 0%) but not disability (standardised mean difference in ODI 0; 95%CI: -0.21 to 0.20, p = 0.99, I squared 0%) was observed between 'treatment' and 'control' groups; these differences were not significant. Additionally, the one study following patients to 12 months did not find any significant difference in VAS and ODI between treatment and control groups.
The current meta-analysis shows that transforaminal epidural steroid injections, when appropriately performed, should result in an improvement in pain, but not disability. The three RCTs that followed patients to 3 months (and the single study to 12 months) have found no benefit by the addition of steroids. The limitations of this study include the paucity of the available literature.
经椎间孔硬膜外注射类固醇用于治疗腰椎神经根痛。然而,仅有少数精心设计的随机对照研究评估了类固醇注射的疗效。
因此,本研究旨在通过对治疗下腰痛和腰椎神经根痛的经椎间孔硬膜外注射疗法进行荟萃分析,评估类固醇注射治疗腰椎神经根痛的疗效。比较是基于基线至指定随访时视觉模拟评分(VAS)和 Oswestry 残疾指数(ODI)的均数差值。
综述了经椎间孔硬膜外注射治疗下腰痛和神经根痛的文献。资料来源包括通过检索 PubMed 和 EMBASE 从 1966 年至 2009 年获得的相关英文文献,以及对已知原始和综述文章的参考文献进行手工检索。最后,搜索包括当前对照试验登记册和 Cochrane 对照试验数据库。
最初的搜索确定了 126 篇论文。筛选后,对 5 项随机对照试验(RCT)进行了分析,只有 3 项对疼痛和残疾结果评分进行了系统随访至 3 个月,其中只有 1 项随访至 12 个月。共比较了 187 名接受局部麻醉/类固醇注射的“治疗组”患者和 181 名接受局部麻醉或生理盐水注射的“对照组”患者。疼痛改善(VAS 标准均数差值 0.2 有利于“治疗”;95%CI:-0.41 至 0.00,p = 0.05,I 平方 0%),但残疾无改善(ODI 标准均数差值 0;95%CI:-0.21 至 0.20,p = 0.99,I 平方 0%);这些差异无统计学意义。此外,随访 12 个月的一项研究发现,治疗组和对照组之间 VAS 和 ODI 无显著差异。
目前的荟萃分析表明,经椎间孔硬膜外类固醇注射,如适当进行,应能改善疼痛,但不能改善残疾。随访 3 个月的 3 项 RCT(以及随访 12 个月的一项研究)未发现添加类固醇有任何益处。本研究的局限性包括可用文献的缺乏。